Bush of course failed to fight the war in Afghanistan because President Cheney was not interested.
He was not interested in seizing Iraqi oil either. His employment was to secure the oil field service contracts in Iraq for Halliburton before the election and continued to draw a paycheck after the election so he secured them for his private employer after he took over the US gov.
Obama did fight the Afghan because America had actually has enemies there who threaten us.
Right or wrong that might explain more casualties..

First Bard, let's clear the air about war and Presidents Obama and Bush. Why are you limiting things to just Afghanistan? Just add in Iraq, and you'll have a more accurate picture of which president invested more patently in wars and the loss of human life. Also, let's remember that death in our wars of choice are not limited to just how many Americans died.

Over time you have been a real booster for small businesses, and you've been consistently beating the drum against taxes and government regulations. However, despite my many requests to detail your complaints, you have been very quiet about the regulations that have been standing in your way. I remember one time you seemingly had a problem child labor laws getting in the way of small business. I have to wonder though whether changing child labor laws benefits children or your business interests and profit. I would guess the latter, because regulations seem to be keeping you on the sidelines. Anything wrong with hiring adults? From all you've said over time, I get the impression that you've got plenty of money, but you don't feel inclined to do much more than invest in financial markets. Tell us more about which government regulations are standing in your way of being a small business "job creator", and why their removal makes good sense for all parties. If you want to gain support, you need to get into the details, and that may mean being a bit more candid about what you are doing and why.

Oh, and let's not forget my earlier post about the government and moral and spiritual issues. I haven't heard your response yet.

Not literally. They run on the order of a trillion dollars, barely noticeable compared to our head-shaking, unsustainable, limitless national debt and the counterfeiting Bernanke's doing to conceal and diminish it. The fiscal impact of 9/11/01 was estimated at a trillion before we even got serious about going to war with Al Qaeda.

There is much to agree with in Bard's support for small business, and in concern that government makes life easier for big business and harder for small business. In fact, the ears of government are much more attuned to listening to really large businesses--the oil and computer businesses--than small business. Small businesses do better if they are well organized and can have associations that comment on proposed laws and rules. In fact, both politicians and bureaucrats are well trained to listen to reasoned comment on both. But truly small businesses don't notice, and thus they tend to be affected by unintended consequences. Larger businesses are also much more adept at securing subsidies, which warp market economics.

But with that said, I think there is an important regulatory role for government that protects public health--and small businesses. I was still in high school when I read about the scandals in the meat packing industry in "The Jungle", by Upton Sinclair. There were similar scandals in the rail businesses and oil businesses, as large businesses cornered the market, ignored human health, and used monopolies to gouge the public. Small businesses were among the targets of such monopolies, and the regulatory responses are now so old that many have forgotten that it was government and unions that protected workers health and curtailed the worst abuses of monpolies.

For large businesses, such as the carbon businesses that are busy securing subsidies and transfering the cost of emissions to the public, the competitive market does not provide any counterforce. It takes the muscle of government to counter those forces. To expect government to be perfect in this function is as wrong as to expect business to be perfect in its functions. Both are run by fallible people.

What I tend to favor is a specific sunset to governmental programs--especially subsidies--so they do not outlive their usefulness. But I think thoughtful conservatives (this obviously excludes the Tea Party) needs to be as smart about what in government needs to be eliminated as thoughtful liberals need to be in thinking about what only the government can do.

I found this site that attempts to assign total costs to of the wars in Afganistan and Iraq including some of the hidden costs. Total to date approx. $2.3 T with at least another $1 T in future obligations. With interest...maybe $4 T. Not to mention the significant human costs of war to our soldiers and their families.

The numbers tell us this...We cannot continue to spend at the same levels on, primarily, defense and healthcare. Something has to give. Note that we could eliminate Medicare and Medicaid and still run a deficit. Defense spending is as responsible for our debt as any government program.

SWC, if you don't see the value in faith, I can't help you. But I'll say my 2 kids have benefited from it. My 15 year old son goes to church every Sunday. (his desire) He's a Blackbelt and varsity football and Baseball player. He is on the youth council of our city. He frequently volunteers for the homeless. This is not driven on girls, money or glory. This is a humble guy that understands that there is more to life than himself. Humble, not arrogant.

Like the left I am disgusted by the holy rollers. Some of them are downright crazy. However, spirituality is a powerful thing. It empowers people to do the right thing. It gives them a reason no to take, but to contribute. You might start with the old Testament. Not because there is so much corruption in the stories. But, because it outlines the failings of man, and coincidentally, the failings of big govt. Really interesting if you read it that way.

I read the Old Testament all way through because my evangelist family insists.
I was surprised how much soap opera, begetting, good advice and politics are in there and how little churchyness.
Begetting was very popular just like now.
Book gets a bad rap because of the crowd that pushes it on you.
The religious kids in our school are a lot nicer and more succesful than the ones I specialize in recruiting.
This is true within each group. Street kids , rich kids, athletes, etc.

Like the left I am disgusted by the holy rollers. Some of them are downright crazy. However, spirituality is a powerful thing. It empowers people to do the right thing. It gives them a reason no to take, but to contribute. You might start with the old Testament. Not because there is so much corruption in the stories. But, because it outlines the failings of man, and coincidentally, the failings of big govt.

Bard, I have no problem with folks that believe in and practice Christianity, or any other religion for that matter, but I have no interest in following a religious life personally. While the Holy Bible does contain many admirable guidelines for conducting your life and living with others, I've found that the same sort of practical advice is readily available today outside of any religious context. Maybe the roots are in religious text, but they have been cleaned up to remove all the religious baggage and nonsense. In the big picture though, just because someone professes to read the bible and follow its teachings, it doesn't mean they really do. The world is full of religious hypocrites.

But getting back to the point you were trying to make in your original post, you implied that the government wasn't providing the moral and spiritual support that folks need. That would seem to suggest that you believe that the government should be doing something to support those needs. As you know from what I said, I firmly believe in the separation of church and state, and I'm resolute in my position that the government has no business in promoting religion in any form.

Again, what do you think the government should be doing in the moral and spiritual area? I hope this isn't going in a direction that restricts a woman's right to choose.

Last edited by swchandler on Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:25 am; edited 1 time in total

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum